Making More Challenging Contradictions
Moderator: EN - Forum Moderators
- SuperGanondorf
- Posts: 3729
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 6:37 pm
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: American English, learning German
- Location: The End of Time
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
Might want to also add a section on the phrasing of statements. I've written one here, if you want to include it.
The games show that whenever someone makes a sweeping or authoritative statement ("There's no way he could have done it!" or "There's no way that car could have been used!"), it's usually a contradiction. There is rarely any challenge in testimonies with those types of statements because they almost always have flaws. The problem is that it can be hard to break out of this mold of beating the player over the head with "THIS IS THE STATMENT! THIS IS THE STATEMENT!" There is a delicate balance between subtlety and leaving out important facts. There are a few ways to make the contradiction statement more subtle:
1. Avoid all-encompassing statements. These generally point the player straight to them since there is rarely any case where something is ALWAYS true. Instead of having a statement like, "He definitely did it. That's the only explanation," try combining it with other statements. "He probably didn't do it. After all, the evidence..." and so on. I am well aware that I am horrible at examples, but I think you see where I'm going here. Combining statements logically can up the difficulty.
2. Disguise the contradiction with personality. Many characters are... odd. Yes, let's leave it at that. Several times in the games, the statements are obscured by odd phrasing and other character-specific quirks, like Redd White's vocabulation or Luke Atmey's arrogance. These quirks, if used effectively, can disguise a contradiction by making it look like flamboyancy or personality. Just don't go overboard and make the contradiction invisible because the statement can't be made sense of.
3. Revealing statements is a killer for making tricky contradictions. AA veterans will by now know that whenever a statement is revealed, it is the end-all be-all. ALWAYS. One way you can break this mold is to have the revealed statement subtly contradict a previous statement in the testimony, like Phoenix's tripping up of Shelley during 2-4. This can, like any mechanic, boost the difficulty if used right. However, this one is a difficult line to tread, since it wouldn't make sense to have completely opposite statements on the record for a testimony ("I found the body at 4" and "I found the body at 2" would be just dumb). Instead, maybe have the revealed statement's implications contradict the original statement, rather than the fact itself. "The killer parked the car in the driveway and went inside" and later in the testimony the statement is revealed, "He came out of the door and ran away", for instance, would raise questions. Why didn't he use the car?
Well, my examples suck and it was obvious I was tiptoeing around 2-4 spoilers for point 3, but I still think this makes sense.
The games show that whenever someone makes a sweeping or authoritative statement ("There's no way he could have done it!" or "There's no way that car could have been used!"), it's usually a contradiction. There is rarely any challenge in testimonies with those types of statements because they almost always have flaws. The problem is that it can be hard to break out of this mold of beating the player over the head with "THIS IS THE STATMENT! THIS IS THE STATEMENT!" There is a delicate balance between subtlety and leaving out important facts. There are a few ways to make the contradiction statement more subtle:
1. Avoid all-encompassing statements. These generally point the player straight to them since there is rarely any case where something is ALWAYS true. Instead of having a statement like, "He definitely did it. That's the only explanation," try combining it with other statements. "He probably didn't do it. After all, the evidence..." and so on. I am well aware that I am horrible at examples, but I think you see where I'm going here. Combining statements logically can up the difficulty.
2. Disguise the contradiction with personality. Many characters are... odd. Yes, let's leave it at that. Several times in the games, the statements are obscured by odd phrasing and other character-specific quirks, like Redd White's vocabulation or Luke Atmey's arrogance. These quirks, if used effectively, can disguise a contradiction by making it look like flamboyancy or personality. Just don't go overboard and make the contradiction invisible because the statement can't be made sense of.
3. Revealing statements is a killer for making tricky contradictions. AA veterans will by now know that whenever a statement is revealed, it is the end-all be-all. ALWAYS. One way you can break this mold is to have the revealed statement subtly contradict a previous statement in the testimony, like Phoenix's tripping up of Shelley during 2-4. This can, like any mechanic, boost the difficulty if used right. However, this one is a difficult line to tread, since it wouldn't make sense to have completely opposite statements on the record for a testimony ("I found the body at 4" and "I found the body at 2" would be just dumb). Instead, maybe have the revealed statement's implications contradict the original statement, rather than the fact itself. "The killer parked the car in the driveway and went inside" and later in the testimony the statement is revealed, "He came out of the door and ran away", for instance, would raise questions. Why didn't he use the car?
Well, my examples suck and it was obvious I was tiptoeing around 2-4 spoilers for point 3, but I still think this makes sense.
Main admin of the official AAO Chatroom
Ace Attorneys: Emerging Legacies Team Member
Creator of AAO's #1 Roleplay, Endless Time! Come join today!
It even has a TVTropes page!
ENDLESS TIME: WINNER OF BEST AAO RP
Also the winner of:
Ace Attorneys: Emerging Legacies Team Member
Creator of AAO's #1 Roleplay, Endless Time! Come join today!
It even has a TVTropes page!
ENDLESS TIME: WINNER OF BEST AAO RP
Also the winner of:
Spoiler : Endless Time's Awards :
- Bad Player
- Posts: 7228
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:53 pm
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: American
- Location: Under a bridge
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
Good guidelines. Also:
4. Hide a needle in a stack of needles. That is, put in a ton of broad, sweeping statements. For instance, if your testimony is... "It's so obvious the defendant is guilty, I don't know why I need to keep saying this. First of all motive; I'm not saying he was the only one with a motive, just the only one with a good motive. His fingerprints were found on the gun. I hardly think there's a better explanation for them being on there than he's guilty. That witness clearly saw the defendant leaving the crime scene... Do you think he saw someone else? Lastly, the fact that the murderer went right for the key hidden in the victim's suit implies they knew the victim well... which the defendant did and I didn't!" Every single statement is one of those broad, sweeping, obviously-contradictory statements. If any one of these was in an 'ordinary' testimony, it would probably be obvious that it's contradictory. But when they're all grouped together like this, being broad and general doesn't make it automatically contradictory because they're all like that. The player needs to consider each statement, think about what the witness is really arguing, whether it really contradicts the court record, how he can present the contradiction, and if it really matters. And once the player has done this for every single statement, they need to think about which contradiction is the best one to present. So... yeah.
Oh, and since it was just brought up, for catching the killer... using a "He knew this when he shouldn't have!" contradiction is laaaaaame. Especially if it's a "Present-evidence-at-the-last-second-and-bluff-it-causing-the-killer-to-be-lulled-into-a-false-sense-of-security-which-causes-the-killer-to-taunt-the-attorney-and-say-some-revealing-piece-of-information-that-then-allows-the-attorney-to-turn-the-entire-case-around-and-prove-that-the-killer-is-guilty" contradiction. The general case was done to death in T&T (literally every case, and huge turning points in a majority) and that specific example of it (you know which case I'm talking about; it was fine that one time but c'mon you can do better in your fancase) is really just a copout when you can't really prove the killer is guilty. Please try to avoid it if you can; if the killer would have gotten away with the crime except for a stupid slip-of-the-tongue, it does not actually feel like you've done anything and caught the criminal yourself.
(Please note that this is not the same as "He knew this... but he knew it wrong!" contradictions, which are kind of the exact opposite of this. Those contradictions are fine.)
4. Hide a needle in a stack of needles. That is, put in a ton of broad, sweeping statements. For instance, if your testimony is... "It's so obvious the defendant is guilty, I don't know why I need to keep saying this. First of all motive; I'm not saying he was the only one with a motive, just the only one with a good motive. His fingerprints were found on the gun. I hardly think there's a better explanation for them being on there than he's guilty. That witness clearly saw the defendant leaving the crime scene... Do you think he saw someone else? Lastly, the fact that the murderer went right for the key hidden in the victim's suit implies they knew the victim well... which the defendant did and I didn't!" Every single statement is one of those broad, sweeping, obviously-contradictory statements. If any one of these was in an 'ordinary' testimony, it would probably be obvious that it's contradictory. But when they're all grouped together like this, being broad and general doesn't make it automatically contradictory because they're all like that. The player needs to consider each statement, think about what the witness is really arguing, whether it really contradicts the court record, how he can present the contradiction, and if it really matters. And once the player has done this for every single statement, they need to think about which contradiction is the best one to present. So... yeah.
Oh, and since it was just brought up, for catching the killer... using a "He knew this when he shouldn't have!" contradiction is laaaaaame. Especially if it's a "Present-evidence-at-the-last-second-and-bluff-it-causing-the-killer-to-be-lulled-into-a-false-sense-of-security-which-causes-the-killer-to-taunt-the-attorney-and-say-some-revealing-piece-of-information-that-then-allows-the-attorney-to-turn-the-entire-case-around-and-prove-that-the-killer-is-guilty" contradiction. The general case was done to death in T&T (literally every case, and huge turning points in a majority) and that specific example of it (you know which case I'm talking about; it was fine that one time but c'mon you can do better in your fancase) is really just a copout when you can't really prove the killer is guilty. Please try to avoid it if you can; if the killer would have gotten away with the crime except for a stupid slip-of-the-tongue, it does not actually feel like you've done anything and caught the criminal yourself.
(Please note that this is not the same as "He knew this... but he knew it wrong!" contradictions, which are kind of the exact opposite of this. Those contradictions are fine.)
Last edited by Bad Player on Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:33 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 10382
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:35 am
- Gender: Female
- Spoken languages: English: the only language I can brag about
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
Or...
Make them all sound contradictory. That's what you're saying, right?
Make them all sound contradictory. That's what you're saying, right?
- mAc Chaos
- Posts: 882
- Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 3:33 am
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: English
- Location: Phyrexylvania
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
I disagree on the guilty guy slipping up and revealing something. In the case of T&T it was a deliberate move on Phoenix's part, so he WAS outsmarted, and he did get caught by Phoenix.
Throwing a lot of misinformation in the form of contradictory statements is OK, if there is only one TRUE contradiction. If there are multiple real contradictions then it doesn't make sense to just have one be the right answer over others.
Throwing a lot of misinformation in the form of contradictory statements is OK, if there is only one TRUE contradiction. If there are multiple real contradictions then it doesn't make sense to just have one be the right answer over others.
- Jean Of mArc
- Posts: 822
- Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:19 am
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: English, French, Japanese
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
SuperGanondorf: Thanks for your contribution!! I put the first two in their own section, and then put the last one in another section that talks about a similar topic. You're very right: the wording is very important to the challenge of the game.
Bad Player: I added your paragraph the same section as Super's. And while I agree that using the "you knew that when you shouldn't have" is lame as a final blow, I think that it is perfectly fine if it is done in such a way that they knew something they shouldn't have, but not necessarily that it convicts them of the murder. In fact, there may be a perfectly reasonable way to explain how they knew it, which solves that problem yet opens up more questions. Plus, you might have to really think about what the witness would and wouldn't know, which could be challenging later in the case. So yeah, don't use it to prove someone is the killer, but it is fine to use it as a means of progressing the trial.
mAc Chaos: It seems like you feel about the same as I do on that situation. As for the "lots of contradictions" thing that Bad Player was talking about, I believe he was saying that there is indeed only one true contradiction, and yet the point is that ALL of the statements look suspect to being contradictable, even though if you look at the evidence they really aren't. That's my understanding anyway.
Bad Player: I added your paragraph the same section as Super's. And while I agree that using the "you knew that when you shouldn't have" is lame as a final blow, I think that it is perfectly fine if it is done in such a way that they knew something they shouldn't have, but not necessarily that it convicts them of the murder. In fact, there may be a perfectly reasonable way to explain how they knew it, which solves that problem yet opens up more questions. Plus, you might have to really think about what the witness would and wouldn't know, which could be challenging later in the case. So yeah, don't use it to prove someone is the killer, but it is fine to use it as a means of progressing the trial.
mAc Chaos: It seems like you feel about the same as I do on that situation. As for the "lots of contradictions" thing that Bad Player was talking about, I believe he was saying that there is indeed only one true contradiction, and yet the point is that ALL of the statements look suspect to being contradictable, even though if you look at the evidence they really aren't. That's my understanding anyway.
- Blackrune
- Posts: 3806
- Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:11 am
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: English, German, Japanese
- Location: The Submarine
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
@BP: You're right about the lameness of the killer just slipping up at the end. Still, depending on how it's done, there might be an acceptable justification. Redd White did only get the direction wrong because he was too confident and just said what he remembered without thinking about it. Not all criminals are calculating masterminds, and it can be fun to watch them get outsmarted.
But that's more about the style and not the difficulty.
I think broad, sweeping statements are one of the most efficient ways. Even better: Reward the player with even more suspicious statements if he dares to press. Everyone will only think about those new, added statements when the contradiction actually was there since the beginning. ^^
But that's more about the style and not the difficulty.
I think broad, sweeping statements are one of the most efficient ways. Even better: Reward the player with even more suspicious statements if he dares to press. Everyone will only think about those new, added statements when the contradiction actually was there since the beginning. ^^
- Bad Player
- Posts: 7228
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:53 pm
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: American
- Location: Under a bridge
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
Blackrune...Blackrune wrote:@BP: You're right about the lameness of the killer just slipping up at the end. Still, depending on how it's done, there might be an acceptable justification. Redd White did only get the direction wrong because he was too confident and just said what he remembered without thinking about it. Not all criminals are calculating masterminds, and it can be fun to watch them get outsmarted.
Bad Player wrote:(Please note that this is not the same as "He knew this... but he knew it wrong!" contradictions, which are kind of the exact opposite of this. Those contradictions are fine.)
@mAC
Spoiler : spoilerz for TEH CASE :
- Blackrune
- Posts: 3806
- Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:11 am
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: English, German, Japanese
- Location: The Submarine
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
Argh, so that's how you meant that. *facedesks*
Wasn't sure and just went by the definition of "any unecessary mistake the culprit makes".
That's why I was a little confused, since even Substitution does technically have something like that as the final contradiction, and it didn't feel lame or anything.
Wasn't sure and just went by the definition of "any unecessary mistake the culprit makes".
That's why I was a little confused, since even Substitution does technically have something like that as the final contradiction, and it didn't feel lame or anything.
- mAc Chaos
- Posts: 882
- Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 3:33 am
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: English
- Location: Phyrexylvania
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
Well, also consider that the suspect HAS to make some mistakes... or you'd never catch them.
-
- Posts: 10382
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:35 am
- Gender: Female
- Spoken languages: English: the only language I can brag about
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
Right. No human is perfect. No crime is perfect, unless... you have them shut off from the world.
- Bad Player
- Posts: 7228
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:53 pm
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: American
- Location: Under a bridge
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
Yeah, I know it did, and I wasn't too thrilled about it. Although it did do a ton of stuff to break the usual mold, which made it a lot better. I could dissect it and go into details about all the factors in that part that make the final present good/acceptable imo, but I think that'd be getting too spoilery xDBlackrune wrote:That's why I was a little confused, since even Substitution does technically have something like that as the final contradiction, and it didn't feel lame or anything.
(Also in Frenchy's original idea it was just going to be exactly like the end of THAT T&T case. Good thing it was convoluted up, eh?)
- SwagmaWampyr
- Posts: 7338
- Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:15 pm
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: English, Basic 1337
- Location: The mucky muck castle made of clouds
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
Spoiler : Tsub :
- Bad Player
- Posts: 7228
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:53 pm
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: American
- Location: Under a bridge
- Jean Of mArc
- Posts: 822
- Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:19 am
- Gender: Male
- Spoken languages: English, French, Japanese
Re: Guide: Making More Challenging Contradictions
Hey all!!
I wrote a complimentary guide to this one that is a collection of different types of cross-examinations.
Check it out here!!
http://aceattorney.sparklin.org/forum/v ... 97#p190397
I wrote a complimentary guide to this one that is a collection of different types of cross-examinations.
Check it out here!!
http://aceattorney.sparklin.org/forum/v ... 97#p190397